We’re talking about allegations carrying potentially devastating consequences for one of the world’s biggest football clubs. Yet the public is asked to accept the conclusions of unidentified decision-makers, reached through proceedings conducted behind closed doors, based on evidence that remains concealed. And we’re supposed to regard this as a triumph of transparency and fairness? Rather than wait for City—which maintains that the decision is factually and legally incorrect—to complete its appeal, the media and punditry, including former players associated with the Incumbent Four, are demanding immediate and severe punishment. Many have spent years treating allegations as established facts. Now they treat a decision still subject to appeal as the final word. This is a complete mockery of due process and fundamental fairness. Even if City ultimately prevails, it will already have been punished in the court of public opinion. Years of reputational damage, attacks on the legitimacy of its accomplishments, and efforts to discredit the Club cannot simply be undone by a successful appeal. And consider the broader picture. A League historically dominated by a handful of established clubs adopts financial regulations that substantially favor those incumbents. Its chief executive, appointed through a process reportedly influenced by some of those same clubs, oversees an investigation into the challenger that broke their dominance. Charges arrive during that challenger’s greatest season. An anonymous commission, constituted under a disciplinary structure connected to the League, ultimately issues a guilty verdict based on evidence the public cannot examine. Meanwhile, a partisan media and punditry demands that the Club be punished before the appeals process has run its course. How could anyone reasonably expect City supporters not to question this process? So, for those wondering why Manchester City supporters are sticking together, defending their Club, and refusing to accept the prevailing narrative, there’s your answer. We’re entitled to demand transparency. We’re entitled to question whether the process has been fair. And we’re entitled to defend our Club against those who decided long ago what they wanted the outcome to be. We will not apologize for any of that. And we certainly won’t play the sad clowns that this deluded circus demands. 2/2